Puzzle, some help please?

[THCL500J8]

Thank you for all your efforts.
Many of use have never seen or will ever see a 5-5R. running let alone, one in bits for us to work on.
So you and Charles have added to our education.

[Stelios_Rjk]

It was also for me a great add to my experience, that's why I couldn't resist.

Happy to help if needed

[Oyster 49]

Oh dear, what a poor design. if the cooling water exit was external like other seagull there would not be a problem! That crank could be repaired, but it would need the corrosion grinding out and then restored using metal spray, then re grinding to size. Fairly expensive!

[Charles uk]

We did look at hot metal spray as a method of saving/repairing these cranks, but the nickel/cadmium spray or stainless is not a suitable medium for oil seals, but is in common use for ball race journals, can only be sprayed up to 20" thou thick & tends to peel off hardened steels, which on a Seagull crankshaft the hard layer tends to be circa 40" thou deep!

It also is prone to porosity which in areas that might see salt water might not be the best idea.

The heat build up in small diameter shafts can also cause distortion.

Good suggestion though !

Still not as expensive as remanufacturing & new crank!

Seagull had no choice in the design as modern outboard legs require cooling as the exhaust gases pass all the way down the leg & without water they cook the water pump & burn all the flash paint job.

I've stripped 5Rs that had blocked water into the leg holes & the water pump body had melted!

[Michael]

Lack of water in the leg will also allow the rubber bushings on which it rotates for steering purposes to melt. And yes, the plastic water pump needs water to stop it melting too. Think if the water ejection had been a couple inches lower, most if not all this problem could have been eliminated. Or there could have been a short shield around the upper drive shaft to stop water from constantly being dumped on it.

[Horsley-Anarak]

I am speechless regarding my findings.

Is that not what you expected to see, rusty crank and conrod?

Hope taking it apart was worth the effort.

H-A

[Stelios_Rjk]

I was waiting less porous, less corrosion and less crud coming out of the crankcase.

Michael, this idea about a shield to avoid exhaust gases and water getting at the lower end of the crank, it also crossed my mind.

[Charles uk]

Now look where the exhaust gases go, & where the paint if not cooled will burn off within 15 minutes of new.

[Oyster 49]

Thinking about it the real question is why fit it to a Yamaha leg in the first place? It would have been fine on a kingfisher leg with FNR. The lower bearing would have remained dry and oily!

[Charles uk]

That's not a difficult question,

It's 1993 & the entire Seagull product range looks like throwbacks to the 1960's with it's 2 tube leg design & turnover has been falling year on year, since the early 1980's & perhaps before.

Japanese & American imports using modern manufacturing technology & design are taking the lion's share of the market that was Seagulls domain in the late 60's.

Your expensive to produce & complicated FNR gearbox doesn't fair well in comparison with the foreign imports.

All your powerheads that can compete with the competition in terms of bhp per litre & fuel consumption per unit BHP, are based on the QUB deflector piston but still require a 25 : 1 fuel mix.

Now put yourself in charge of Seagull & answer the question yourself.

[Oyster 49]

Yes, all too late and rushed. If only they had developed their product line whilst they were at their peak!

[Adrian Dale]

"all too late and rushed. If only they had developed their product line whilst they were at their peak!"

That statement can be applied to large sectors of British industry from the 70's through to the 90's. a good example being the total collapse of the motorcycle industry. It wasn't all caused by Unions, high wages and arrogant management. Lack of vision left thousands of manufactures in the same fate.

If a bloke in a shed and a few like minded mates around the world can fix a design problem and turn a losing engine into a winner, it says little for the technical abilities of BS in the last years of their production. I am sure there will be lots of excuses as to why it was so but the facts speak for them selves. ppd leads to ppp

AJ

[Charles uk]

Not really a bloke in a shed, I have access to all the equipment in a couple of engineering workshops, manual & cnc mills, lathes of similar types, grinders, spark eroders & tig welders, & I'm retired, so I'm in a very fortunate situation of being able to play.

Not wishing to upset Seagull , I don't remake current parts only the sexy bits no longer available, so really only Marston & racing bits.

And I have the benefit of being able to look at 170's & late model QUBs after they've led a hard life, something Seagull couldn't do, as less than 8 staff & no money in the till tends, to preclude R&D & design improvements.

I think your being hard on Seagull, they were only a small British outboard manufacturer, miles from the major manufacturing centers, selling mainly to the commonwealth or the excommonwealth, but just couldn't afford to battle the might of Yamaha, Honda, Susuki, OMC & Mercury.

But they did survive 1 world war & almost 60 years, with a product that commonley lasts over 50 years, very few can claim that!

[Adrian Dale]

The reference to "the bloke in the shed" was not derogatory, I find it is a significant achievement even with the equipment available. However I feel you miss the point, the time for development had long passed by the late 80's, the competition was a lap ahead and the public were already celebrating the good times with faster and more innovative designs. SG's time was in the 60's when they were at their peak, cashed up with a good solid market, that was the time they needed to be introducing new innovative products that would give them a platform for the future. But like Norton, Rover and Swanhunter Shipyards, to name but a few, they missed their opportunities. In the late 60's the completion was not so far away; BMW for instance had been close to bankruptcy but climbed back to become one of the major car manufactures in the world.

SG had a solid simple design but it was never going satisfy the expanding pleasure market that was rising in the wings and, by the time Thatcher rose to power, British industry was already headed for self destruction.

AJ

[Gannet]

Adrian,

Interesting comments about British Industry self destructing. You are right of course.

However, the full story is that our clever far seeing leaders, realised that manufacturing industry was yesterdays activity.
Thatcher and her ilk stated that service industries, especially financial, were the future. That is why we have now got in the Uk some of the world's leading financial institutions.
These honest, well run companies, with balanced salary and renumeration policies, are a beacon in a turbulent world. They treat customers and companies in a fair, helpful and honest way. Indeed, they are not interested in their own individual personal advancement. They are there to create wealth in the whole economy. As recent news has shown, they are also helpful to tax dodgers, drug dealers, corrupt politicians and dodgy business people. The fact that their greed and irresponsibility brought down the world's economy and everybody's standard of living was just unfortunate. We valued them so much that we all helped to rescue them, so that they could carry on with their good works.

Jeremy